I’m interested in having a discussion about bias and standards in Wikipedia’s editorial process, especially who decides and how is it decided what constitutes “worthy” sources of knowledge or if a subject is important enough to “deserve” an article. One recent example is the controversy over creating a standalone article for the twitter hashtag #yesallwomen. Most Wikipedia editors fit into a specific set of demographics- single, educated males in “developed” countries aged 18-30 with no children. What are the micro- and macro-level implications that arise when most of the editors come from the same social group- especially in one of the most dominant information sources worldwide? What solutions might attract a more diverse base of editors? Is the wiki model liberating (by putting power of knowledge creation in the hands of anyone who wants to participate) or does it reinforce structural oppression (access is limited to those with internet access and literacy, and it can be difficult to make edits that are not deleted)?
THATCamp on Twitter